Remembering Balloon Boy

Does anyone remember the balloon boy hoax?  These people were the central point of what "reality TV" and the lust for fame has become in our country.  They pulled off this hoax in an attempt to make money from infamy, nothing more, and nothing less.  They are no different than an attorney who takes a high profile case in order to make money, and is willing to lie, pervert justice, and watch a guilty murderous human being walk free, just so he can exchange publicity into money.  


Some people use bad behavior to get noticed, and sadly, some find that crime pays handsomely.  


Millions of people tuned in via CNN hoping and praying the little boy would be alright.  Experts on television later took positions on whether or not the 911 call was legitimate, or if this was a hoax.  The emotional strain upon a caring American public is beyond a price tag.  


Statement Analysis gets to the truth, even if this author loses all reason when he hears a woman cry.

Below is the 911 call from a frantic mother and father trying to explain that their son has floated off in a flying saucer — one they say "emits a million volts on the outer skin" every five minutes and could electrocute their 6-year-old.  Since we already know they were lying, it still remains useful for teaching the techniques, or for some, practicing the application of detecting deception.  This husband and wife time are, like politicians, generous in donating sample for us.

Dispatcher: Ma'am, what's your name?
Mayumi Heene: My name is Mayumi Heene.
Dispatcher: Ok. And you're at the 5434 Fossil Ridge Drive Now?... And so it was an experimental plane?
MH: It's a flying saucer.

This indicates that discussion has already taken place.  The initial contact is important for analysis:  the very first words in response to "911, What is your emergency?" will put the subject into a classifiction of caller and is revelatory.  Here, we do not have it.

Dispatcher: It's a flying saucer? And that's gone too, right? Is the flying saucer gone as well?
MH: Yes, um, about 20 minutes or so

It is a yes or no question but the mother gives, instead, an answer of time

Dispatcher: They've both been missing for a bout 20 minutes?

MH: Yes. Oh my God, oh my God my son!

Yes confirms what she said.  They've both been missing for about 20 minutes.  Note that lying is stressful and it is generally avoided whenever it can be, via missing information, dropped pronouns, avoidance and so on.

Dispatcher: Hang on just one second don't hang up, ok? Ma'am, does it have any kind of a tracking device or anything on it?
MH: No, no nothing.
Dispatcher: Ok, is it electronical?
MH: Uh, you know I needed to talk with husband. ...

note that she "needed", past tense, to talk with husband, and not, "you need" to the operator, so she could gather information.  MH appears in a panic at this point and wants to bail out and let her husband take over.  People say what they mean and we should not interpret, but listen.  She tells us here that she should have talked to her husband; that she "needed" to talk to him.

Dispatcher: Ok I can't understand what you're saying ma'am. Does he know how to work the flying saucer?

MH: Yes. I think he's calling somebody.

Dispatcher: He's what?

Dispatch is a bit surprised and repeats back words that are sensitive, such as "flying saucer" and the fact that while making this horrific report, her husband is making a phone call. 

MH: He's calling somebody.

Note that "somebody" is gender neutral. 

Dispatcher: He's calling somebody?

Dispatch is surprised.

MH: Yeah.

Dispatcher: Who's calling somebody?

Dispatch is very surprised.

MH: My husband.

Dispatcher: Ok, let me talk to him.

Dispatch has had enough. 

MH: Rick! He's coming over.

YOU MIGHT ALSO BEINTERESTED IN

 

Dispatcher: Hello? Hello? Ma'am, did you find him?

MH: No, we haven't found him yet.

Dispatcher: Ok, where was the saucer, was it in the backyard?

Richard Heene: Uh hello?

Remember our original analysis of 911 calls, especially in emergencies:  Any time a caller who should be frantic and zoned upon the safety of the person at risk uses a greeting, it should be flagged for deception.  Some examples of greetings in 911 calls include Adam Baker, father of Zahra Baker, and Tiffany Hartley.  People under "excited utterance" in dire need of help do not make small talk but go right for assistance for the victim.  This brings up another point:   assistance for the victim.  Some guilty callers will ask for help, but it is not for the victim; it is for themselves.  It is generally a truthful thing:  they do need help.   The exception is a person administering CPR or in the process of saving a life in which the caller needs help.  I am aware that, thus far, Zahra Baker's father has not been charged, but he had guilty knowledge when he made that 911 call, and was deceptive in other statements.  Not only did he greet the operator, but he went on to disparage Zahra, howbeit subtly, but nonetheless, guilty callers find a way to push away blame and guilt, and find a way to 'justify' their actions by blaming the victim.  Even in thefts, we find insults towards the company or the person victimized. 

Dispatcher: Is this Richard?

RH: Yes it is.

At this point, a parent of a missing child would likely jump right in.  Recall:  he wants police to think his son is flying in the air in a dangerous apparatus.  

Dispatcher: Ok how long has the 6-year-old been missing?

RH: Um, just a few minutes.

note that Mother said it was 20 minutes; but to Dad, it is just a few minutes. THis is not credible given a parent's worry and high state of adrenaline alert.  Perhaps this is what his wife meant when she said she needed to talk to her husband:  get their stories straight.  Many readers seem to pick up on this readily. 

Dispatcher: Was the flying saucer in the backyard?

RH: Yes.

Note the economy of words by a father who should have been out of his mind in fear. 

Dispatcher: Ok, so it obviously has electronics which he can know how to work and he gets it up off the air, off the ground?

RH: No, he doesn't know how they operate.

Note that this does not have any indicators of deception.  It is likely truthful that he does not know how to operate the flying saucer the world was watching on television.  Note the contraction "doesn't" rather than the emphatic "does not" (Reid)  This is relaxed and highlights the truthfulness that the boy did not know how to operate it.  But, here, he also uses the plural, "they" meaning more than one flying saucer when there is only one being watched via television. 

Dispatcher: He does not know how to operate, so and that's gone though too, right? And you're sure that he's in that?

Here is the critical point of deception.  The operator is reflecting back what is known:  the boy does not know how to operate the contraption.  Because of having a tough time believing these two, clarification is sought in a "yes or no" question.  Yes or No questions are the easiest to lie with and so every word after "yes" or "no" becomes highly significant:  

RH: Yeah, we looked everywhere and then my son just said — he's terrified — he said yeah he went inside just before it went off. Because we have it tethered it wasn't supposed to take off.


Oh, those pesky pronouns!


Pronouns (and articles) are instinctive.  They are learned from our earliest days and via shear volume of use, they are spoken without thought. 


"Yeah" is weaker than "yes".  "Is your son on that dangerous thing so high up in the air that he could easily die?" would be answered by a father with a resounding "YES"; not a casual, "yeah".  We do not need to hear his voice inflection, but the word chosen.  In a "yes or no" question, he said, "yeah" and then immediately shifted to:


"we"


He is the boy's father.  He is responsible.  The most natural response would be "I".  But, in case you struggle on this one, at least you should know that pronouns are easy to make fit when you are telling the truth.  He said "we" plural, but then not plural, "my son" instead of "our son" and then went back to the "we" again.  This inconsistency itself indicates deception. 


Note that he did not report that his son was inside the balloon, which would be a direct lie; something rare.  Instead, he uses his son's language.  "Yeah, he said he went in..." but he did not say "in the saucer" or "in the balloon", and it is this type of choppy way of speaking that a liar avoids telling a direct lie.  He appears to be unwilling to blame his son in full, so instead does not finish the sentence "he said he went in the flying saucer" as he likely felt the internal stress of not only lying but bringing his son into it.  This is a reminder of the fiasco when he had his children on TV and tried to get them to lie; where he was outed by his own son. 

Dispatcher: So was it running then?

RH: Well it doesn't run, it's filled with helium. And it operates off of a million volts to move left and right — horizontal. And we were testing it to find out what effects we could get.

Dispatcher: OK. And so it was last seen 20 minutes ago?

RH: Um, probably. I'm gonna check the time. Probably, yeah.

You or I would know how long our 6 year old is up in the air, possibly with a child,  but this sentence shows the usefulness of analysis:

1.  The use of "probably" shows room for doubt, therefore, sensitivity indicator. 

2.  Repetition of a word shows sensitivity.   Note that it is the same word, showing that time frame is a topic of sensitivity for the subject, which would now cause the analyst to conclude:

First, that he said "probably" so he is not certain, but

Secondly, deception may be present since he repeated the qualifier.  Next note the continued inconsistency in pronouns in his response: 

Dispatcher: Ok. So there's no electronics on it, there's no tracking device, right?

RH: No, no. I don't know whether it's possible you guys could detect the electricity that it emits, but every five minutes it comes on for one minute, and uh, it emits a million volts on the outer skin. And uh, if he takes a ride in it he could get electrocuted.

Note that he should be telling the operator what he knows; not what he does not know.  Here we find him seeking information, rather than giving it.  At this point, the analyst may need to remind himself or herself that this is supposed to be a 911 call of an emergency, not an interview.  Next note that he only offers that "if he takes a ride in it he could" get harmed by the electricity. 

Dispatcher: Ok, so every five minutes it comes on for one minute and then shuts off again.

RH: Right.

Dispatcher: And it does that to charge?

RH: No, no, no, no.

Dispatcher: Ok, ok, that's ok. How big is this machine?

RH: It's 20 feet across. Are you there? It's (?) feet high.

Dispatcher: Ok. And the wind is blowing pretty good today, which direction is the wind blowing?

RH: Hold on one second. Who the hell is calling me?... It's blowing southeast. So he's headed right straight for the Loveland airport. I only hope the FAA you now was listening to me because if an aircraft hits it, I mean you know.

Statement Analysis starts off believing what the subject says.  Here we learn what he hopes for:  The FAA.  

Most would hope for the return of the child, but he hopes the FAA is listening.

If the FAA is listening, it will be the publicity he has hoped for.  

When speaking to a parent of a missing child, the word "hope" is always sensitive.  

Dispatcher: So it might be headed for the Fort Collins, Loveland airport area

RH: Uh yeah, I think it's just the Loveland.

Dispatcher: Is it silver in color?

RH: Yeah, it's got aluminum foil on it, that's how it gets its charge.

Dispatcher: And its totally silver foil, right?

RH: Yes.

Dispatcher: Ok. And he has no idea how to turn it or anything is that right, no instruction has been given to him?

RH: No, no, there's no way to turn it, no.

Dispatcher: And he has no idea how to land it or anything right?

RH: No. And there's no communication — I mean it was just supposed to be in the backyard, you know?

"You know" is a habit, and it is important for an analyst to note when the habit shows itself, just as it is important to note when it does not appear.  It shows an awareness of the interviewer's questioning (here, the interviewer is the dispatcher), indicating that he is aware that dispatch has been questioning the validity of this call. 

Dispatcher: Ok hang on just a second don't hang up...

Dispatcher: Ok sir we've already contacted the FAA they've already been made aware of it. I'm gonna go ahead and call the Loveland airport and let them know as well, ok? Sir? Hello? Hello? Hello?

This fulfilled his "hope"

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dispatcher 1: 911 What is the address of your emergency?
Dispatcher 2: Hi, this is Fort Collins with a transfer for 5434 Fossil Ridge Drive.
Dispatcher 1: OK
Dispatcher 2: Phone number is ....
Dispatcher 1: K
Dispatcher 2: This woman and her husband are pleading that their 6-year-old son had an experimental flying saucer that they built.
Dispatcher 1: Mmhmm.
Dispatcher 2: They believe that their 6-year-old son is in it and flying around. They left less than 20 minutes ago.
Dispatcher 1: OK. Thank you.
Dispatcher 2: He's on the phone with me now.
Dispatcher 1: OK, thank you. M'aam, what's your name?
Mayumi Heene: My name is Mayumi ... Mayumi Heene.
Dispatcher: And you're at the 5434 Stossel Ridge drive now?
Mayumi Heene: 5434 ... yes
Dispatcher: And it's Fossil Ridge Drive, right?
Mayumi Heene: Yes, yes.
Dispatcher: Is it Drive east or west?
Mayumi Heene: West
Dispatcher: OK. And so it was an experimental plane?
Mayumi Heene: It's a flying saucer.
Dispatcher: It's a flying saucer?
Mayumi Heene: Yes.
Dispatcher: And that's gone too, right?
Mayumi Heene: Sorry?
Dispatcher: Is the flying saucer gone as well?
Mayumi Heene: Um, like 20 minutes or something.


She needed to talk to her husband to come to an agreement about time. 




Dispatcher: They've both been missing for about 20 minutes?
Mayumi Heene: Yes.
Dispatcher: OK.
Mayumi Heene: (crying) We gotta get my son!


Mothers, in particular, are instinctive protecters and the use of the word "I" shows the owning of responsibility and even when a mother is seated next to her husband, when the topic is critical, the first person singular is more likely to be used. 

Dispatcher: OK. Hang on just one second. Don't hang up, OK? Just a minute.


(silence/pause)

Dispatcher: Ma'am, does it have any kind of a tracking device or anything on it?
Mayumi Heene: No, nothing.
Dispatcher: OK. Is it electronical?
Mayumi Heene: Uh, you know, you need to speak with my husband ... (unintelligible) my husband
Dispatcher: OK. I can't understand what you're saying, ma'am ... Does he know how to work the flying saucer?
Mayumi Heene: (completely unintelligible)
Dispatcher: What?
Mayumi Heene: He's calling somebody.
Dispatcher: He's calling somebody?
Mayumi Heene: Yes
Dispatcher: Who’s calling somebody?
Mayumi Heene: (completely unintelligible)
Dispatcher: Let me talk to him.
Mayumi Heene: OK.

Dispatch struggled to wonder why he was making phone calls. 


This ended with his son, terribly upset being told to lie, vomiting on television and showing his father to be a liar. 


How selfish must one be to put his own children through such trauma in order to gain fame?  What was the final cost of search and rescue operations?  


Can we put a price tag on the emotional toll of a public praying and hoping for his safe return?

Aliayah's Mother Hires Attorney

Now we likely know why there was no reward offered from the onset, and why such strange things were a part of this case: 


1.  Statement Analysis showed concern.
2.  Body language showed incongruity between words and head shaking. 
3.  Mother has not appeared in public nor has made any pleas. 
4.  the 2 hour "search" appeared like alibi building. 
5.  Police have said so little at the daily press conferences.  They have likely known all along but did not want to hasten the mother into hiring an attorney and impeding progress.


Law enforcement searching will have acute increase in tension as they believe that the mother is withholding the information.  As each day passes, anger will grow.  Local Attorney, Tom Dyer, was right when he said that if the subject turned herself in, she would be treated more favorably than if she lets this drag on and on. 


Given her criminal background, and the neglect suspicion of a 3 year old missing 4 teeth, and so on, it appears that Aliayah has met foul play, and her mother is in need of an attorney.  Add in to this the opinion of locals who have spoken about drugs and violence, and a frightening portrait has emerged. 


We had expected an arrest shortly after the mother gives birth, but now that she has a defense attorney, we may not see an arrest.  We do hope, however, that this attorney will follow what was said earlier in the week:  that the location of Aliayah will be given.


Why has the family not released a picture of Aliayah more recent than last Christmas?


Why, when speaking of the child, did her aunt reference Christmas, which was almost a year ago?


When was the last time someone outside the family saw Aliayah?


Child Protective Services have reportedly removed the other children from Lena Lunsford, and may have been informed by police of a pending, or hopeful arrest.


Attorney Tom Smith, of Charleston has been retained.  It does not appear that the original strategy offered personally from a prominent attorney earlier this week, has been followed.  It was hoped that Lena would call him, give up the location of Aliayah, and turn herself in.  


We can only hope that this will not be a case similar to Kyron Horman where the step mother, Terri Horman, quickly lawyered up after failing a polygraph, and remained silent.  Horman has steadfastly refused to give up the location of 7 year old Kyron's remains.  Emboldened by the lack of success, perhaps Lena Lunsford will not yield to heavy questioning about what happened to little Aliayah.  We may place our hopes in the step father.  Where there are two who know what happened, there is often a pressure upon the relationship to not only remain silent, but to stay together for life, tied together by the bond of a terrible secret; a bond many believe turns to poison over time. 


Search teams have been reduced to only professionals in order to make sure that no information leaks out.  This means that police believe she is dead, and do not want the crime scene description to become public knowledge.


Police likely knew, from day one, what they were dealing with.  Lena claimed to have "searched" for her child for 2 hours, running out of gas, but buying cigarettes.  When a neighbor said he was outside during the "search", he said that no one asked him, "have you seen our 3 year old baby?" raising more suspicion that the child has been long dead. 


"We want her home" is not something we expect a mother to say who is not sitting with the child's father.  For an innocent mother, nothing is more highly personal than her missing child.  We expected to hear her say emphatically, "I" want her home.  Yet, while she spoke, she looked away and shook her head, "no" as her body appeared to belie her words.  Note at the end of the interview that we do not see a mother being sincere, but deceptive.  When someone is deceptive, or has done something that provokes guilt, research tells us that they use "we" more than "I" with the feeling of 'spreading out' the guilt, making it less severe.  When a mother speaks of her child, it is highly personal and "I" is used most readily. 

Aliayah's sad face has been before us for more than a week now, with our initial view raising suspicion.  

gene simmons wedding

This wedding invitation Gene Simmons



deets on gene simmons wedding revealed.



Gene Simmons and Shannon Tweed's wedding invite



Gene Simmons is finally revealing what Shannon



Gene Simmons, Shannon Tweed Invitation confirms wedding date



Beverly Hills Hotel Gene Simmons Wedding Photo



Gene Simmons Shannon Tweed Reveal Wedding Details Gene Simmons



Gene Simmons Shannon Tweed Reveal Wedding Details Gene Simmons


Gene Simmons, Shannon Tweed Wedding Date Revealed


KISS rocker Gene Simmon's upcoming wedding to his fiancée Shannon Tweed



Kiss Star Gene Simmons & Partner Snap Playboy Playmate.



miley cyrus Gene Simmons Shannon Tweed Breakup


Kiss front man Gene Simmons finally sets wedding date after 27 years with



Now get ready for the wedding for rock royalty. KISS bassist Gene Simmons


Gene Simmons and Shannon Tweed at Katsuya in Hollywood


Gene Simmons and Shannon Tweed are getting ready to make it official



ET has an exclusive first look at the wedding invite for Gene Simmons



KISS front man Gene Simmons will marry his girlfriend of 28 years



Gene Simmons and Shannon Tweed. The Israel-born KISS rocker is set to tie


Gene Simmons Wedding, Kiss to Marry Shannon Tweed in October, Bride Details

Statement Analysis and Politics

Question:   Can you do analysis without political sway?


Former President Bill Clinton has always 
been generous to us with regard to samples for analysis.  Here, he continues.  As to our question, only you can answer for yourself.  Regardless of your analysis, it is likely that 50% will be pleased; and 50% will object; some will be happy, and some will be not.  You will be accused by some, of being partial.  Others, due to personal persuasion, will dismiss analysis.  Although based upon commenting, readership is more female than male, the overwhelming number of comments regarding Amanda Knox, for example, are male.  Of these, few are happy with the analysis. 


Yet, this is the struggle of analysis for some, and leaves them with an uncomfortable pressure:


The same analysis that proved Casey Anthony is lying,  which they heartily agreed with, seeing both the means and the end; is the same analysis that proves their personal favorite killer to be also lying. 


What to do?


But, at least it is with politics that no matter what your personal viewpoint or party affiliation, your politicians will provide you with lots of rich sample of which to analyze. 


I promise. 

Bill Clinton wants more credit

• 
  
  
  

• Email
• Print

Earlier Friday, the former president attended a bridge dedication at his presidential library. | AP PhotoClose

By JAMES HOHMANN | 9/30/11 11:10 PM EDT

Bill Clinton thinks he deserves more credit for reforming welfare and balancing the budget.

“I go crazy every time I read the conventional wisdom,” he said Friday night at his presidential library in Little Rock, Ark. “So part of the Republican narrative is that I was saved from myself by the election of the Republican Congress [in 1994] that forced me to do welfare reform and ‘made the balanced budget possible.’”

One of the more difficult aspects of analysis is learning where a subject has entered into the language of another; and where the subject speaks for himself.  This is most often seen when a husband or wife enters into the language of the spouse.  Here, the subject calls it "the" conventional wisdom, rather than "a" or without an article.  This is an indication that the topic (conventional wisdom) has already been introduced.  Here the analyst must seek to know if these are embedded admissions of what took place, although it may not be intentional by the subject, or if he is quoting someone else.  Note that he credits "the" conventional wisdom with these statements, rather than specifying anyone in particular.  This should cause the analyst to work from the premise that there may be an embedded admission within the subject's words. 

Continue Reading

• 
  

POLITICO 44

Clinton said reporters and commentators “keep saying this, overlooking all relevant facts.”  We recognize that not all quotes are present; but exerts from a long speech.  Here, he identifies, perhaps, the identity of "the" conventional wisdom:  "reporters and commentators"; yet no one individual is quoted.  We are looking to see if the language is the subject's, or another's.  

The 42nd president said Arkansas had been a test case for reform during his governorship. At the federal level, he said 43 states received federal waivers to implement welfare reform before the GOP-controlled House passed the final bill.

“And yet I kept reading how this was ‘a Republican idea,’ just because President Reagan had a good story about a welfare queen and a Cadillac who didn’t exist,” Clinton said.

Note that a sentence which begins with "And yet" is likely missing information.  He now says that this was something he "kept reading" (not "read") which suggests sensitivity of the action (as it was ongoing).  Note that he says "President Reagan had a good story" follows the noted "because" (which tells us why; not what).  He asserts that "a" welfare queen with a Cadillac did not exist"; not "the welfare queen" which would specify a particular "welfare queen".  This should cause the analyst to question if the subject is making up this "story" that he attributes to another.  Those who have studied liars know that when someone is able to shake his finger at the camera, (President Clinton, baseball players before Congress) and boldly lie, are not going to be reliable at any time in their lives.  Each statement must be viewed for veracity within itself, but the subject, himself, is a liar, something learned early in childhood and practiced, reflectively, for a lifetime unless a crisis experience takes place in which the subject seeks change through understanding.  

The subject may be telling the truth, but alertness should always be present.   

The feisty comments came during 20 minutes of unscripted remarks that immediately followed a one-hour panel discussion commemorating the 20th anniversary of Clinton announcing his run for president in front of the nearby state house. They showcased a Clinton determined to present himself as a transformational figure.

Six senior aides from the 1992 campaign had waxed nostalgic, praising their old boss for revitalizing the Democratic Party and changing the way campaigns are run.

When Clinton took the microphone, he riffed on the importance of offering voters a compelling story line.

“I’m telling you this to point out that we need a coherent narrative,” he said. “The No. 1 rule of effective politics, especially if the people you’re running against have a simple narrative — that government is always the problem, there is no such thing as a good tax or a bad tax cut, there’s no such thing as a good program or a bad program cut, no such thing as a good regulation or a bad deregulation — if you’re going to fight that, your counter has to be rooted in the lives of other people.”

This should be considered personal and sensitive to the subject. Note the comparison of "coherent" narrative to "simple" narrative as a change of language.  A change of language should represent a change in perceived reality.


"Other" people are noted. 

His speech included an attack on the tea party governing philosophy.

“We need to understand that one of the things that tends to tilt things toward the Republicans’ anti-government narrative is our country was born out of a suspicion of government,” Clinton said. “King George’s government was not accountable to us. That’s what the Boston tea party was about. When the tea party started out, at least they were against unaccountable behavior from top to bottom. Then it morphed into something different. If you want to go against that grain, you’ve got to tell people you understand it’s a privilege and a responsibility to spend their tax money, but there’s some things we have to do together. And that’s what the purpose of government is, to do the things that we have to do together that we can’t do on our own.”

“If we can make that choice credible,” he added, “then our candidates — starting with the president — and our principles will be fine.”

Among friends and longtime supporters, the 65-year-old looked at ease and spoke lovingly about the aides and Arkansans who helped him get to the White House two decades ago.

“We were looking at total meltdown about a week before New Hampshire,” Clinton recalled, praising James Carville for the way he handled the blow-up over the Vietnam letter.

Continue Reading

“He likes to act crazy because it helps him get speaking gigs,” Clinton joked. “He figures if he goes around acting like he needs a rabies shot that more and more people will want to see him.”

Clinton said commentators struggled to deal with him when he stepped onto the national stage because he did not fit easily into one easily defined category.

On the issue of race, he bragged about having the highest percentage of African-Americans on his professional staff of any state attorney general in America in the late 1970s.

Panelist Vernon Jordan, the civil rights icon who chaired Clinton’s presidential transition in 1992, heaped on praise.

“The party was lost at sea,” Jordan said. “And Bill Clinton came in 1991, and he was to the Democratic Party what Rosa Parks was to the civil rights movement. … He was to the Democratic Party what Martin Luther King became to the movement. It was change. It was different. It was fresh. It was young. It was also experience. He’d been governor a long time. It was renaissance time in the Democratic party, and a lot of the older Democrats had to be brought around.”

In any statement, note the names and note the order in which the names appear to show priority for the subject. 

Al From, the founder of the Democratic Leadership Council, marveled at Clinton’s ability to give the same charter school speech to two different groups with opposite interests and get them to see him as on the right side of the issue.

Frank Greer, media consultant to the 1992 Clinton campaign, said it took someone from the South to bridge the gap between working whites and African-Americans.

“He understood it because he had lived it,” he said. “It was growing up in the South.”

Former Little Rock Mayor Lottie Shackleford, deputy campaign manager in 1992, talked about how Clinton was a party outsider who did not initially attract many movers and shakers.

“It was true grass roots,” she said.

Carville talked about the innovations in the 1992 Clinton campaign. Every campaign has a war room now. The “it’s the economy, stupid” mantra has long become cliché. The candidate bus tour that seemed somewhat novel when Clinton did it is now standard practice for national candidates.

“The campaign was not just a different way,” Carville said, “but it was sort of a cultural transformation in American politics.”

Why No Reward In Missing 3 Year Old?

3 year old Aliayah Lunsford was reported missing last Saturday.

Immediately when her mother spoke, her short statement caused us alarm.  "We want her home" she said, though she was not speaking with her husband, nor the baby's father?  The video showed the mother shaking her head "no" while averting her eyes off to the side.  Although not body language experts, this jumped out at us immediately.  Although the case was highlighted on HLN, no one from the family appeared on the show.

We learned that the mother was previously incarcerated.
We thought of neglect (bottle rot) when we learned that the 3 year old was missing 4 teeth.
We have heard rumors from locals about drugs, violence and Child Protective Services involved, possibly removing the other children.  When the mother gives birth, including Aliayah, it will be her 7th child while she is yet 28 years old indicating heavy child care responsibility as a stressor.

Where is Aliayah?



  Here are a series of questions of which the public is asking that raise issue about the investigation:

1.  Why is there no reward offered to the disappearance of 3 year old Alialah Lunsford?

2.  Why have police been so tight-lipped?  Why bother to hold a news conference when no information is given?

3. Why is the photo of Aliayah, who is reported to be "missing" from last Christmas?  A 3 year old child changes dramatically:  would it not be advantageous, if a child were considered alive and abducted, to have the most recent photo released to the public?

4.  When the aunt spoke of her, she spoke of last Christmas.  Why?  Have there not been events in a 3 year old's life since?  Birthday parties, outings, get-togethers, and so on?  This is concerning.

What someone says is a reflection of what they are thinking.  If this child was indeed "missing"; would the aunt have spoken of her in the past tense unless she possessed knowledge (or belief) that the child was dead?  Why did she immediately speak of last Christmas when stores are, this week, beginning to put out Christmas supplies?

Statement Analysis asks you to ask yourself how you might answer a question:  If your 3 year old niece was missing, would you, rather, speak of just yesterday, when you held her, read to her, or gave her a cookie?  If the aunt lived far away and had not seen her since last Christmas, it would be appropriate that her memory reached for it, but here, the aunt lives across the street.

5.  Why has the mother avoided the public?  Why has the step father avoided the public?  When media had the mother on camera, why no questions?  Did they ask questions of her, only to have it edited out via request?

it could be now apparent that the police are waiting until the mother gives birth to make any major announcements.  Their assertions that they have evidence on one hand, that they are working from, while on the other hand saying they have no evidence to suggest she is not alive is splitting of words. This is important because they recognize that anything and everything they say can be used by a defense attorney, putting pressure on them to satisfy the public that they are doing their jobs, without impeding the investigation.

They are also dealing with high emotions among the public, which can be volatile, as we saw yesterday when one woman told everyone to stop "rumors" because rumors won't allow the police to do their jobs.  It is this type of irrational emotional response that police are acutely aware of.

Anyone who thinks will wonder what happened to Aliayah, and the growing number of legitimate questions without answers shows a caring and concerned public.

It appears that the answer to, "where is Aliayah?" lies within the hearts of the mother and the step father, and they may be remaining silent and not cooperating.

Local  Media is not asking questions.

The citizens have a right to know while police need to protect the integrity of the investigation.

 Casey Anthony looms large over America.

If police are crossing their 't's' and dotting their 'i's', all the better.

But the public remembers.

The public remembers the names of:

 Haleigh Cummings,


who's step mother, Misty Croslin, at 17, seemed to be more than the police could crack in the interrogations and interviews, in spite of failed polygraphs and parade of lies.  Her phony 911 call was only rivaled by Haleigh's father's parade of lies and sabotaging of the investigation.  Drugs and children do not mix.  Haleigh was a victim of a druggie home, replete with neglect, physical violence, and likely sexual abuse.

Kyron Horman.

Terri Horman flunked her polygraph, lied, and hid behind her lawyer so as to increase the suffering of Kyron's parents.

Hailey Dunn.

Billie Jean Dunn and Shawn Adkins lied, failed polygraphs, were druggies and into child porn, yet no charges have been filed against them to date.  Hailey's grandmother rages online against the mother and her boyfriend, not knowing what to do with her anger and loss.  Just after Hailey went missing, she told the nation that the mother's boyfriend, Akins, raped and killed Hailey, and every news release in the last 9 months has only strengthened her view.

Does America need a video tape of every killing to go forward in justice?  Is this the legacy of Casey Anthony?

Caylee Anthony.


In this case, police had everything but a video tape of the killing (including a video tape of the mother's two reactions to media reports of the body found:   one flinging her hair back with a smile, the other with doubling over in fear).  Granted they had a bumbling attorney who, himself, could not follow his own arguments, and they had perjuring family members willing to do anything to smear Caylee's name, but still:



When "a plus b equals c" of circumstances, a reasonable person will conclude the same.

Let's hope we regain our sense of justice.

Can a mother, in America, kill her baby, dump him in a garbage pail and go on to tell stories in order to confuse everyone, get away with it?

Baby Gabriel. 


There are plenty more:

Americans know that a toddler doesn't stand up, kiss his mommy, walk out the door, and not be seen by a household of 9 people, and vanish into thin air.  It doesn't happen.


We step back from the case of Aliayah Lunsford trusting that police know what they are doing and are, as what appears, stalling for time with bogus press conferences, all the while desperately searching for Aliayah, until the mother gives birth.

We expect some news to be forthcoming.

Why no reward in the case of missing 3 year old Aliayah Lunsford?  One may be offered soon, as they react to the public questioning, but that it was not offered early on is telling.

There may be an arrest soon.  This may be why some searchers are being turned away and why so little news is offered.  It looks contrived to call a daily press conference to announce that no information will be divulged.  They need to re-think their strategy, if they have not already.

We will continue to cover this tragic case.